Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: old Court: andhra pradesh Year: 1964 Page 1 of about 21 results (0.034 seconds)

Jan 21 1964 (HC)

Duddu Koteswara Rao Vs. Motumarru Sambiah and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-21-1964

Reported in : AIR1966AP252

chandra reddy, c.j. 1. the proper interpretation of exs a. 1 and b. 1 is the subject matter of this appeal. the question that poses for consideration is whether the transaction evidenced by these two documents is a mortgage by conditional sale or an outright purchase. 2. the property in dispute is a house site and terraced rooms situate therein. the agreement to sell this property appears to have been entered into on 16-7-1923 for a sum of rupees 8,400 and the whole of the consideration paid at about the time; but the document of sale was not executed fill 2-8-1925, on the same day, the transferees executed an instrument agreeing to reconvey the property if the sum of rupees 8,400 paid to the transferor was repaid to him with interest at 1 per cent per mensem. under this document the option to repurchase was to be exercised between 2-2-1926 and 30-7-1927. the transferor did not avail himself of this right within the stipulated period. nothing was done by him in this behalf till 7-2-1950 when he called upon the transferees to retransfer the property to him on receipt of such amounts as might be found due on taking of accounts. the transferees refused to comply with this demand and sold the property in their turn on 12-7-1950 for a sum of rs. 20,000 to a firm of which chebrolu audinarayana, chebrolu chenchu subbiah, vura venkateswarlu and kurapati raghavulu, were the partners. notwithstanding this, no action was taken by him till 29-1-1953 when the present action was initiated .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 1964 (HC)

Pullareddigari Venkatasubba Reddi and ors. Vs. Pullareddigari Peddasub ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-03-1964

Reported in : AIR1964AP458

..... ) that ex. b-1 was inadmissible since it defeats rights of the plaintiff in immovable property. it is this view of the learned judge that is impugned in this letters patent appeal.6. it is argued by shri narasinga rao for the appellants that the learned judge erred in thinking that the counter filed by the appellants referred toan award that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 07 1964 (HC)

Akarapu Rajachanna Visweswara Rao Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Andh ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-07-1964

Reported in : AIR1965AP1

..... power under section 35 of the act. his argument is that a mistake must not involve an elaborate enquiry into the facts, but the mistake should be apparent i.e. , patent from the record, and in exercise of the power under section 35 should not deprive the petitioner of his right to appeal against the original assessment order. while it is ..... either the question of fact or law, in such a case also it may contended that such mistake is not apparent from the record. but in cases where omission is patent, it can hardly be argued that such an omission does not constitute a mistake within the meaning of section 35 of the act. what has happened in this case is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 04 1964 (HC)

Pappu Suramma Vs. Boggavarapu Somanna (Died) Boggavarapu Suryanarayana ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-04-1964

Reported in : AIR1965AP51

..... , justice sanjeeva rao nayudu reversed the decision of the trial court and dismissed the petition for recovery of this interest. (4) in this appeal, under cl. 15 of the letters patent, it is this view of the learned judge that is impractical before us. it is urged by shri jagannadha rao on behalf of the appellant that since this money was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 18 1964 (HC)

Varada Bongar Raju Vs. Kirthali Avatharam and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-18-1964

Reported in : AIR1965AP86

(1) this appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent is directed against the judgment of our learned brother justice chandrasekhara sastry in second appeal no. 270 of 1962. the learned judge while reversing a part of the judgment of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 18 1964 (HC)

A. Janardhana Rao Vs. Deputy Transport Commissioner, Kakinada and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-18-1964

Reported in : AIR1965AP115

..... a right of appeal on a person who 'having opposed the grant of a permit, is aggrieved by the grant thereof or by any condition attached thereto'. in a letter patent appeal preferred from the decision of subba rao, j. (as he then was), a division bench of the madras high court consisting of rajamannar, c. j. and venkatarama ayyar, j ..... the act was one of the material points raised before subba rao, j. who disposed of the writ petition and also before the division bench, which disposed of the letters patent appeal. it is beyond the pale of possible doubt that the determination of the question whether a right of appeal was conferred in that case by s. 64(b) of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 1964 (HC)

Velivelli Sydulu Vs. Guntupalli Venkateswarlu

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-22-1964

Reported in : AIR1965AP318

..... learned brother justice seshachalapati, agreeing with the conclusions of the trial court, restored the judgment of that court. the learned judge, however, granted leave under cl. 15 of the letters patent and that is how the matter is before us. (6) the first point that arises for consideration is whether the debt in question is tainted with immorality. it is urged ..... chandra reddy, c.j. (1) this letters patent appeal is filed against the judgment of justice seshachalapati in s. a. no. 575 of 1959 with the learned judge's leave.(2) the facts giving rise to this appeal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 08 1964 (HC)

Mothey Gangaraju, Zamindar and Sons Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-08-1964

Reported in : AIR1965AP60; [1965]16STC205(AP)

narasimham, j.(1) this is an appeal against the judgment of venkatesam, j. in s. a. no. 421 of 1957 by which he dismissed the suit filed by the respondent therein for the recovery of rs. 1919-7-0 as interest at 6 per cent per annum on the sales tax collected from it on 26-2-1954. (2) the only point involved is whether the state of andhra, which levied the said tax, is liable to pay interest from the date of collection to the date of decree, having refunded the tax collected with interest from the date of decree. (3) the learned district munsif dismissed the claim. on appeal the additional district judge decreed the claim. our learned brother set aside the order on appeal and restored that of the district munsif. (4) the relevant facts, about which there is no controversy, are these : the appellant-plaintiff is an assessee. it is a registered firm carrying on business on commission agency and independently in certain commodities. it was assessed to a tax of rs. 7248-6-2 on its business for the year 1945-46. in a suit levy filed by the firm, o. s. no. 111 of 1952, the said levy was held to be illegal. after the said declaration by the court, the amount, which was collected, was refunded together with interest from the date of such pronouncement. the present suit was laid claiming interest on the amount collected at 6 per cent per annum from the date of collection, to wit, 26-9-49 to 25-2-1954 when the levy was declared illegal. (5) in plain para 8, it is alleged thus :'the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 14 1964 (HC)

Kantiti Narsanna and ors. Vs. Kantiti Satyavati

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-14-1964

Reported in : AIR1966AP107

narasimham, j.1. this is an appeal under the letters patent against the judgment of kumarayya j. in a. s. 39 of 1959, by which the learned judge decreed the plaintiffs suit for partition of items 1 to 8 of plaint .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 14 1964 (HC)

Gadam Reddayya Vs. Varapula Venkataraju and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-14-1964

Reported in : AIR1965AP66

chandra reddy, c.j.(1) in this appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent, with the leave of the learned judge, the crucial terms of the maintenance deed (ex. a. 8) which fall to be considered are : - 'challamma during her life time, can raise .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //